Evo vs VR-4 engines

This section is for talk about anything to do with everything in the engine bay.
Post Reply
User avatar
Rally_2.6LC
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:59 am
Location: Either under a car, on the computer or in bed...around Ryde

Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by Rally_2.6LC »

Hey guys, this is sorta a overall question but thought I would put it here.
Researching difference between Evo's and VR-4's, without going into everything about them the main difference I can find between them is the power difference between them.
VR-4's made around 177kw (6th Generation) and Evos around the same. After that they evo's gained more power (up to 201kw by the III).
Evo's seemed to keep climbing, and im assuming this is to do with the tune more than anything else.
Wondering apart from power, does anyone know what the difference (if any) is in the running gear/gearbox/everything else under the car from an evo to VR-4?


Cheers Matt
'75 GC daily (slowly dying)
'80 LC 2.6L rally car (generally something broken until 2 weeks before an event)
'71 GA 2.6 Turbo project (i only wanted the diff and got another project)
^This side up^


Formely "Matt"
A112H
Posts: 7681
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:01 am

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by A112H »

I think the big changes from VR4 to EVO III were inlet manifold design, exhaust manifold design, tuning and turbo size
User avatar
Rally_2.6LC
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:59 am
Location: Either under a car, on the computer or in bed...around Ryde

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by Rally_2.6LC »

Sorry probably should have been a bit more clear, wasnt just refering to up to evo 3, but more like up to probably 6 (9 pushing my budget a bit for what I want).
I suppose what im trying to ask is VR-4 much different from Evo?


Cheers Matt
'75 GC daily (slowly dying)
'80 LC 2.6L rally car (generally something broken until 2 weeks before an event)
'71 GA 2.6 Turbo project (i only wanted the diff and got another project)
^This side up^


Formely "Matt"
A112H
Posts: 7681
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:01 am

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by A112H »

Evo IV plus is no use to you. The swapped the gearbox side in the engine bay so when these are made RWD the inlet and exhaust manifolds are on the wrong sides.
Apart from ancillaries there is not a lot of difference between VR4 and EVO I, II & III. Even the N/A's are the same with slightly less aggressive cams and no oil squirters, they even use the same rods. Gotta love Mitsi's :)
User avatar
Rally_2.6LC
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:59 am
Location: Either under a car, on the computer or in bed...around Ryde

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by Rally_2.6LC »

Doesnt bother me with which way the intake/exhaust is.
Interested in them as a whole.
Might go VR-4 as they are cheaper, and if much of muchness I can just get it retuned if I feel the need for more power.


Cheers Matt
'75 GC daily (slowly dying)
'80 LC 2.6L rally car (generally something broken until 2 weeks before an event)
'71 GA 2.6 Turbo project (i only wanted the diff and got another project)
^This side up^


Formely "Matt"
A112H
Posts: 7681
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:01 am

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by A112H »

My Dad has a 6G VR4 and he has recently changed the exhaust manifold for a Evo III one and said it has made a big difference.
User avatar
BlueThunder
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:18 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by BlueThunder »

What i noticed is that a VR-4 (N/A or turbo) has big ports and evo's have small ports in the head. Maybe it's because of the turbo that they made them smaller? pressure vs airflow/-mass or something?
Image
User avatar
davenq
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:50 pm
Location: townsville....

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by davenq »

And blocks,..were they all narrow block?
Growing old is inevitable
Growing up is optional
A112H
Posts: 7681
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:01 am

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by A112H »

Yep, all RWD 4G63's were wide block and all FWD/AWD 4G63's were narrow blocks
User avatar
BlueThunder
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:18 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by BlueThunder »

A112H wrote:Yep, all RWD 4G63's were wide block and all FWD/AWD 4G63's were narrow blocks
Why does a 4G63 out of a '82 Scorpion (Sapporo) fits on the km132 gearbox in my Celeste (LB hatch)? The distance between the dowel pins is about 31cm... Sounds like that RWD is also a narrow block then?
Image
A112H
Posts: 7681
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:01 am

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by A112H »

Any proof that was the factory fitted engine in the Scorpion??
dwlee
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 5:38 pm

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by dwlee »

In NZ some Sigma and L200 came with 4g63 in rwd and were narrow block.
User avatar
BlueThunder
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:18 am
Location: Antwerp

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by BlueThunder »

A112H wrote:Any proof that was the factory fitted engine in the Scorpion??
This is a factory fitted engine of a 1982 A164AH GSR Sapporo. This car has the 4G63GS engine with the twin mikuni's on it.

Keep in mind that we, in Europe, had/have some different models than you guys have in Australia...
Like we eg never had the 4g54 in our cars and you guys did.
Image
A112H
Posts: 7681
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:01 am

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by A112H »

Okay so in Australia, all RWD 4G63's were wide and FWD AWD were narrow.
RaptorReed
Posts: 431
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 4:03 pm
Location: Oak Harbor, WA

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by RaptorReed »

E38A/E39A Galant VR4s
6 bolt 4g63s
Big port head
6 bolt refers to flywheel
Depending on which model and year vr4,
You could have 14b, 450cc injectors
16g turbo w/ 510cc injectors (example GVR4 Evo spec aka "Evo 0")
CAS or Cam Angle Sensor is located on the head, Green tops are Optical, Black are Hall effect

-----------
NA DOHC 4g63s have larger throttle bodies, at least the ones over here did.
------------

Evos 1-3
16G turbo
Small port head
7 bolt 4g63s
Fixed/non adjustable smaller Cam Angle Sensor on the head and a Crank angle sensor up front.
Head has a different intake port stud pattern from a 6 bolt. So you cannot use a 6 bolt intake manifold on a 7 bolt or vice versa, if you do use a 7 bolt on a 6 bolt you would have to not only have to hack the flange off to suit the 6 bolt, but also port match the manifold runners to suit the big port head.
Exhaust manifolds are interchangeable though
Alternators have different plugs
Different throttle bodies
Evo 3 is the most sought after for parts in the US, from Exhaust manifold, to Turbo to the Gearset.
However in light of the Tsunami and quake, we cannot get Evo 3 Big 16Gs anymore not enough supply for the demand, so a once $500 turbo (best bang for the buck) became a $1000+ turbo. Evo 3s 16Gs had the biggest compressor wheel of all the 16Gs at the time, 7cm turbine housing, 7cm o2 housing. Gearset is pretty beefy. A Ported Evo1-2 exhaust manifold could flow as much as stock Evo3 exhaust manifold, but like I said "ported" to match that of the Evo3. Standard exhaust manifolds and 14B/16Gs have 6cm turbine housings.

While we didn't get Evos till the Evo 8 over here, we had DSMs from 92.5-99 that came with 7 bolt 4g63s, 2nd gen DSMs share the same motors as Evo 1-3s except they all came with Garret T25/450cc injectors (autos had 13Gs 90-94) 90-94 turbo DSMs regardless of 6 bolt/7 bolt were 14b/450cc, and our GVR4s were pretty much like base model cars with 14b/450cc injectors.

Evo 4-9
Changes
The motor is flipped 180 degrees out in design - thus not really ideal, because you would need a custom bellhousing to suit any sort of RWD transmission. A KM132 will not bolt to it.
Twin Scroll 16Gs
Injection is in the Intake manifold runners not in the head like 6 bolts and early 7 bolts.
Image
Evo 9s have MIVEC
Exhaust manifold doesn't have the standard TDO5H 4 bolt flange, they have a weird offset divided 4 bolt flange (twin scroll after all)


early 7 bolt or 6 bolt intake manifold - injectors go into the head, not on manifold.
Image


There's probably a few other differences, but that gives you some idea and why when it comes to 4g63 swapping these cars or any cars, people look to the earlier motors. Evo 4-9 are just too goddamn different to want to mess with unless you have the money to do it.


Hope some of this helps Matt! When you say "4g" over here in the US, the average mitsubishi enthusiast automatically thinks "4g63", most don't know about all the other engines, unless they have a Colt Galant/Lancer/Celeste/Sapporo/L200 or Starion. When I kept talking about 4g63s and only using "g63t this g63 that" some member on EvoM couldn't figure out that I was talking about the 4G63 and so thought he needed to call me names and such, but I broke it down to him what just saying "4G" all the time actually means. :lol:

Tim
Tim
94 Montero SR
79 GE Sigma Wagon
76 Galant Coupe
92 Galant VR4
88 Fiji Blue Starion
User avatar
davenq
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:50 pm
Location: townsville....

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by davenq »

Thanks , (I think) ,..I have an L200 I am about to start playing with and was looking for a "bolt up" power gain. It is an atmo, 4g63, sohc, carbied ,2l. and was wondering if an EVO IV would bolt in? ...obviously not. ,
Growing old is inevitable
Growing up is optional
User avatar
mrelshauno
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 6:00 am

Re: Evo vs VR-4 engines

Post by mrelshauno »

I think you will want up to EVO 3 for simplicity.
Post Reply